::::::::
The debates in this political season, while plentiful beyond imagination, have largely been empty exercises in corporate controlled video news gotcha, with precious little to reveal policy positions of the candidates. What is more important is that the electorate get an impression of the demeanor and governing capability of each candidate.What we find instead is how we can connect candidates to people they have encountered in their lives through six degrees of separation and whether those we connect them to should cause us to cheer or condemn them. Or we are regaled by the responses of the chosen few to powder puff pitches that are guaranteed to sail over the outfield wall.
What we learn of policy is what can be revealed in five minutes of contentious discussion.
What we learn of lesser tier or third party candidates is nil, since, by and large, they are not allowed to participate by those corporate vetters who control the gate.
An alternative to this broken, possibly irreparable system is required. Where shall we find such an alternative?
I suggest that the alternative is before your eyes at this moment. It is the same alternative you turned to when the puffery, the irrelevance and the falsity of the main stream media became impossible for you to stomach. It is the internet alternative to the news.
Would it be possible for OpEdNews.com to provide an electronic forum for debate? As an internet imbecile, I must put the question to others better equipped to judge.
What I see would be the development of a series of questions, posted at the OpEd site with all of the candidates' campaigns invited to post responses. It could be linked with polling questions for those who review the responses, and a discussion forum devoted to a judgment of the merits of their arguments.
So, what say ye? Is this something that is possible or desirable? Will it provide a true alternative to the mainstream media's circus of nothingness? Or will it simply add to an already oppressive cacophony?
Don't hold nothin' back.
